Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 8 Vote(s) - 3.38 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Trails
(06-04-2018, 09:46 AM)panamaniac Wrote: Any plans for a sidewalk on the "north" side of Mill?

There's a vision. And oh, what a vision! Check out page 42 of the PARTS Rockway Plan. I stumbled upon it by accident today, and had no idea that all this was going on in the background. More at:

https://www.kitchener.ca/en/city-service...areas.aspx
...K
Reply


It looks like this section of trail is closed for a very long time:

   

   

   

   

(I went to explore it this weekend and was disappointed that I didn't make it very far before encountering the closure.)
Reply
Week 6 progress for the Victoria to Gage section of the IHT:
   

Spacing seems a little tight for bike trailers between the bollard bases (especially between the west (left) and centre ones):
   
   

Week 2 progress for the Queen to Victoria section of the IHT (I hadn't realized the bend in the trail would be so severe through here):
   
   
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
Week 2 progress for the Queen to Victoria section of the IHT:
   
   
   

Having looked at the realignment at West I am not sure if the angle and sight-lines are ideal. The crossing is right at the widest part of West, at the crest of a slight hill from both directions, on a curve where motor vehicles tend to speed and cheat across the centre line. I was hoping the final design would narrow West a bit on the west side and at least put a small median to slow traffic down a bit (or take advantage of the width and put an actual safety island/refuge. Based on the fresh concrete pours it doesn't seem that either of those are the case.
   
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
(06-11-2018, 10:43 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: Week 2 progress for the Queen to Victoria section of the IHT (I hadn't realized the bend in the trail would be so severe through here):

Don't you know, minimum turning radii are for cars, not bikes!
Reply
What ever happened to the proposal to move the traffic signal from Peppler at Bridgeport to Laurel Trail at Bridgeport?

Obstacle of the day (not sure why they need a fence around the repaving of a parking lot) - Laurel Trail near Erb:
   
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
It’s ridiculous, they have paid security people to hang out there too. I shake my head every time I ride by.
Reply


(06-11-2018, 10:53 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: ...

Having looked at the realignment at West I am not sure if the angle and sight-lines are ideal. The crossing is right at the widest part of West, at the crest of a slight hill from both directions, on a curve where motor vehicles tend to speed and cheat across the centre line. I was hoping the final design would narrow West a bit on the west side and at least put a small median to slow traffic down a bit (or take advantage of the width and put an actual safety island/refuge. Based on the fresh concrete pours it doesn't seem that either of those are the case.

The diagrams don't show any changes to the road, but the city and Region are apparently planning to make improvement...likely a pedestrian island.  I get the idea it'll be a separate project, no idea on the timeframe.
Reply
Looks like they are proposing to replicate the Laurel trail crossing on Erb at Bridgeport by relocating the signal at Peppler:
Proposed Relocation of Intersection Pedestrian Signal (IPS) – Bridgeport Road

It doesn't look like they are planning to leave even an activation button at Peppler (since it is one-way) as was suggested on these very pages.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
That's very unfortunate.

Here's what they say:

Quote:In response to comments to consider maintaining the existing signal and adding a second pedestrian signal at the trail crossing, staff assessed the merits of a second pedestrian traffic control signal located at the Laurel Creek Trail crossing. Current Regional practice is to follow provincial guidelines documented and shared through the Ministry of Transportation.  Based on these guidelines, a second traffic control signal is not warranted based on the distance to a down stream traffic signal.  
The distance between the Bridgeport Road/Peppler Street intersection and the Laurel Creek Trail crossing is approximately 130 metres.  
Traffic control signals should only be considered if the distance between them is 200 metres or greater. Traffic control signals located closer than 200 metres of one another can experience the following negative impacts:
  • Poor progression between traffic signals;
  • Potential for vehicles to queue up to and through the adjacent signal; and
  • Motorists may recognize and react to the downstream traffic signal indication.

All of the above may lead to both safety and operational concerns as a result of having two traffic signals installed too close to   one another

All of this is complete bunk, in Uptown. There are already many pairs of traffic lights that are closer than 200m already in Uptown. Notably on Erb, Bridgeport, and William, there are lights 100m apart.

To hit those points directly:
1) If they do not connect the signal operation at all, then sure, it could cause backups. However we've detailed in this thread that thanks to the one-way street, it's easy to tie the lights together to support almost as much flow as today.
2) Queuing through intersections should not be a reason not to provide safe crossings for pedestrians.
3) At several other locations in Uptown, drivers are able to correctly read their lights without issue, well under the "200m" requirement
Reply
This is talking having two signals though (leaving the existing one at Peppler and adding a new one at the Laurel trail).

It doesn't explain why they can't move the signal lights, but leave the beg-button at Peppler that also triggers the relocated signals along with a new beg button at the Laurel Trail.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
(06-15-2018, 07:59 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: This is talking having two signals though (leaving the existing one at Peppler and adding a new one at the Laurel trail).

It doesn't explain why they can't move the signal lights, but leave the beg-button at Peppler that also triggers the relocated signals along with a new beg button at the Laurel Trail.

Good comments on this issue. The staff response is unfortunately exactly what I would have expected — a reference to standards, combined with an absolute refusal to actually think about the local situation. The fact that they don’t even mention the idea of having two activation locations for one signal is also not at all surprising. And people of this calibre try to design cities?
Reply
(the segment of the Walter Bean Trail just South of Fountain, which was closed for quite some time, has reopened in the last few days. Photos here.)
Reply


(06-15-2018, 06:54 PM)Markster Wrote: 3) At several other locations in Uptown, drivers are able to correctly read their lights without issue, well under the "200m" requirement

The more I think about this, the more frustrated I get.

Didn't they just rebuild King St between Allen and Central fresh, a 1km stretch, with 7 signals in that span (Allen, John, Union, Mt Hope, Pine, Green, Central Fresh)? Why wasn't this a problem there?

Also, if the Peppler signal is only used 38% of the time it really shouldn't affect users of Bridgeport all that much. Plus, more crashes than expected are occurring in that area so isn't a little bit of "Poor progression between traffic signals" a good thing to slow traffic down to closer to the actual posted speed limit along this section (50km/h) when most are probably doing 65-70kph?
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
Frustrated by the lack of progress and updates on this project I have reached out to the city directly. I'll post anything they tell me.

It doesn't look like a single Pebble was moved on the Gage to Victoria section over the last few weeks:

IHT week 7 progress:
   
   
   
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 9 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links